Skip to main content

Mental Illnesses a Leading Cause of Hospital Admissions, But Treatment Lags Behind


Would you send your mother to a pediatrician for her arthritis, or your child to a geriatrician for his well-baby exam?

Probably not – unless there were no other provider in town.

But some new reports from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) suggest that something akin to that is happening every day to people with mental illnesses.


They make for fascinating reading, with an unexpected twist at the end. 

Spoiler alert – mood disorders are among the most common reasons for hospitalizations for people under 65.  But mood disorders aren’t driving the increase in hospital costs, because the procedures hospitals most often perform have nothing to do with treating people with mood disorders.

Mood disorders accounted for 877,000 hospital inpatient stays during 2010.  Apart from being born, they were the #1 reason that children under the age of 18 were admitted to hospitals, ahead of pneumonia, asthma, and appendicitis.

Mood disorders were also the 3rd most common primary diagnosis among all people between the ages of 18 and 44.  The other four in the top five all related to childbirth and delivery.

And among adults between the ages of 45 and 64, mood disorders ranked 5th as a reason for inpatient hospitalization, behind four conditions closely related to aging – osteoarthritis, back pain, chest pain, and coronary artery disease.

Mood disorders may be common reasons for hospitalization, but they have nothing to do with the recent increase in health care costs.

The mean cost of a hospital stay was $9,700 in 2010, up from $6,700 (in 2010 dollars) in 1997.  That represents a 45% increase over a thirteen year period. 

But the mean cost for mood disorders was less than half of that – just $4,800.  And what’s even more interesting is this.  That represented a 6% decrease from the $5,100 cost per stay in 1997.

On the other end of the scale, the most expensive hospital stay was for adult respiratory arrest, at $22,300.  In other words, we pay almost five times more for people to die in a hospital than to be treated for mental illness in a hospital. 

We also pay $18,000 to diagnose and treat an acute brain injury – four times than what we pay to diagnose and treat a chronic brain disease.

And in every age group, the most common procedures hospitals perform have nothing to do with mood disorders. 

Among children, hospitals most frequently offer vaccinations, circumcisions, respiratory intubations, and appendectomies.  Among younger adults, the most frequent procedures include those related to child birth and delivery – such as Caesarian sections and repairs of obstetric lacerations, and blood transfusions.  And among older adults, blood transfusions, cardiac catheterization, respiratory intubation, and upper GI endoscopy are most common, along with knee and hip procedures for the very old.

So what do we need to do to respond to the needs of people with mood disorders who are entering our hospitals?

The answer isn’t to deny or restrict care to patients with mental illnesses who show up at hospitals because they have no other place to go, or to force hospitals to discharge patients with mood disorders before they are ready to go, or to wait for jails to pick up the slack – as we do in so many places today.

We have choices.

One is to fund more community treatment programs – to replace those we lost to massive budget cuts – so that thousands of people can avoid hospitalizations in the first place.

And another is to insist that when patients are admitted to hospitals, our new mental health parity rules and regulations mandate payment for hospitals to use new procedures like functional MRIs (fMRIs) to diagnose more accurately – and therefore to treat more effectively – mental illness in their patients. FMRIs are brain scans that can show differences in brain activity that are correlated with specific mood and anxiety disorders. 

FMRIs aren’t exotic – they have already been used in consumer studies to measure consumer preferences for brand names. If we can use fMRIs to help sell cola or political candidates, why can’t we use them in hospitals to help treat mental illness?

We always have choices.

To reach Paul Gionfriddo via email: gionfriddopaul@gmail.com.  Twitter: @pgionfriddo.  Facebook: www.facebook.com/paul.gionfriddo.  LinkedIn:  www.linkedin.com/in/paulgionfriddo/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Veterans and Mental Illness

On a sultry June morning in our national’s capital last Friday, I visited the Vietnam Veterans Memorial .   Scores of people moved silently along the Wall, viewing the names of the men and women who died in that war.   Some stopped and took pictures.   One group of men about my age surrounded one name for a photo.   Two young women posed in front of another, perhaps a grandfather or great uncle they never got to meet. It is always an incredibly moving experience to visit the Wall.   It treats each of the people it memorializes with respect. There is no rank among those honored.   Officer or enlisted, rich or poor, each is given equal space and weight. It is a form of acknowledgement and respect for which many veterans still fight. Brave Vietnam veterans returned from Southeast Asia to educate our nation about the effects of war and violence. I didn’t know anything about Post Traumatic Stress Disorder when I entered the Connecticut Legislature in the late 1970s.   I had only vag

Scapegoats and Concepts of a Plan: How Trump Fails Us

When a politician says he has “concepts of a plan” instead of a plan, there is no plan. And yet, that’s where we are with Donald Trump, nine years after he first launched a political campaign promising to replace Obamacare with something cheaper and better, nearly four years after he had four years to try to do just that. And fail. Doubling down during Tuesday’s debate, he claimed he had “concepts of a plan” to replace Obamacare. Really? He’s got nothing. In fact, he sounds just like Nixon sounded in 1968, when he claimed he had a “secret” plan to get us out of Vietnam. That turned out to be no plan at all (remember “Vietnamization?”) and cost us seven more years there and tens of thousands of lives. The Affordable Care Act, about which I wrote plenty in this blog a decade or more ago, wasn’t perfect. But it was a whole lot better than what we had before it – and anything (save a public option) that has been proposed since. Back then, insurers could deny coverage because of pre-exi

Anxiety and the Presidential Election

Wow. Could the mainstream media do anything more to raise our anxiety levels about the 2024 election? And diminish or negate all the recent accomplishments in our country? Over the past three-and-a-half years, our nation’s economy has been the strongest in the world. Unemployment is at record lows, and the stock market is at record highs. NATO – which last came together to defend the United States in the aftermath of 9/11 – is stronger than ever. Border crossings are down. Massive infrastructure improvements are underway in every state. Prescription drug costs are lower. We finally got out of Afghanistan – evacuating more than 100,000 U.S. citizens and supporters – with just a handful of deaths. Inflation – which rose precipitously in the aftermath of the pandemic – has come back down, and prices in many areas have even begun to decline. And yet, all the media commentators can talk about these days – and they are not “reporters” when they are clearly offering opinions to frame the